No Offense to all atheist but.......

,,,,, catchy title ahe! , any way back to the real topic ,i have been an atheist since the age of reasoning (when i was 12) , I've always kept it to my self never joined any groups ,but lately I've joined a couple of forums and face book's , what i have noticed is i am ashamed of calling my self an atheist ,i have noticed that all of these people are only enjoying bashing religious beliefs ,"holy" books ,creeds and religious people (not that i don't enjoy bashing them) , but the issue in hand is that all of these people don't really understand atheism , i had a chat with a lot of them non of them read or know any thing about existentialism (and the few who now are either miss-quoting Friedrich Nietzsche's quotes or even mispronouncing the name !).
but any way back to the point ,when i read see these neo-atheist guys they just seem to me like an atheist version of a Spanish inquisitor ,non of them really understand the true enslaving power of religion , the danger of human divinity , the true power of religious brain washing ; non of them ever read Thus spake Zarathustra by Friedrich Nietzsche , non of them ever read the Existentialism and Humanism Lecture by Jean-Paul Sartre , non of them ever read Alamut by Vladamir Bartol , non of them ever read the Holy and the Holy Grail , non of them read the satanic Verses by Salman Rushdie , non of them ever read the Devils of Loudun by Aldus Huxly ,non of them ever read Atheist Manifesto by Michel Onfray,,,, (Wow! that's a long list , but its enough to make a point ).

Replies to This Discussion

This has been a very interesting discussion. It speaks to the heart of being an atheist. What binds us all together as atheists is our unbelief, not our level of intellectual abilities to speak to this fact.

Will Rogers once said, “ I don’t belong to any organized political party, I’m a Democrat.” I guess the same can be said about being an atheist. Unbelief is all that is necessary.

Because you read a couple of books you think you're more enlightened? You shure you're not religious? And yes the type you talk about are posers most of the time, but looks like youshould fit in. Religion bashing is a fun thing to do, but you don't need to read boring ass books to be qualified an "atheist". I'd bash some pseudo intellectual babbling about existentialism or friedrich whatever just as much a I'd bash some sientologist and his xenu.

"some hints for next time: its not philosophy or novels that triumph over the god delusion, it's SOLID SCIENCE, stuff that really DESERVES to have UNI-VERS-ITIES"

(my emphasis in bold)

I feel I should point out that without the philosophy you deride there would be no science or "UNI-VERS-ITIES". The trains of thought and the teachings of the natural philosophers - probably the first scientists - are the bedrock of all our scientific thought. Science requires the assumption of a metaphysical philosophy that cannot be proven beyond that of any other metaphysic. Just because we accept it as the best way to seek knowledge and advancement does nothing to change the fact that it is a philosophy.

If all you wish to deal with are cold hard facts that you can put in a laboratory and poke with a stick, that's fine. But if you also wish to throw away the philosophy - both ancient and modern - then you will never understand how it is we have a laboratory in the first place, or why we need to keep poking things with sticks.

"some hints for next time: its not philosophy or novels that triumph over the god delusion, it's SOLID SCIENCE, stuff that really DESERVES to have UNI-VERS-ITIES"

1) Science is a form of philosophy (i.e. a form of epistemology concerned with logic, reason and empiricism). There is no secret behind the fact that the greatest philosophers to live were also among the greatest scientists and mathematicians and vice-versa.

2) Philosophy triumphs science in two words: pessimistic induction.

Philosophy nurtures critical thought which is required for any and all endeavors in the realm of science.

So, reading Nietzsche and Sartre make you a better atheist than everyone else? Sounds like elitist BS to me.

I've read some of them, that didn't make me an atheist. Rational thinking at the age of 9 before I had ever heard of Nietzsche or Sartre did it for me. Add to that higher education in Biology and Physics, an understanding of the world we live in and a total disregard for high falootin' philosophy and BS and I am the atheist I was to begin with from the day I was born.

Stop reading books and thinking that makes you a better atheist than the ones around you. Go out and live life and learn something of value and then participate in the conversation that is life. Until that point, you come off like a spoiled kid with nothing of value to say.

I kinda get what you're saying....this is kinda one reason why I don't want to call myself completely atheist yet, because i don't want to bash either ppl religions either...then I'd just be in line with the religion that i left.

All you really need is a lack of belief in gods. Your ability to speak to the philosophical differences or expound upon the details of various religions is, I think, a by-product of rational thought and critical inquiry.

Critisism of religion is not a neccesary part of being an atheist - nor is speaking out on behalf of atheism. Having said that, there is definitely a great amount of personal growth to be had by learning about subjects such as religious history, philosophy and critical thought.

Ask questions and then question the answers you're given.

And do not be afraid of admitting when you're wrong, or that you don't know!

I think you are getting in a little over your head with this. Not all atheists enjoy philosophy, perhaps they just don't like being lied to. Perhaps they don't like the group-think mentality of church or perhaps they are just too involved in their own lives to think about something as silly as God. Or perhaps they do like some of those things but not all of them. You just gave a grab bag of varying philosophical standpoints. Not all atheists are also humanists or existentialists, or nihilists or (insert x materialist philosophy here). Ayn Rand was an atheist however as an objectivist/ethical egoist she was certainly not of the same philosophical ilk as the existentialists like Jean-Paul Sartre or Albert Camus or Simone de Beauvoir and all of their reasons for their disbelief in God was probably different than that of Bertrand Russell who was a positivist.

I, myself, am quite enamoured with the finer philosophical points having read much of what you have listed and more. I am in the middle of writing a book which applies redactional/historical/comparative criticisms to various texts in the New Testament (and the books of Daniel and 1-4 Maccabees because they set the stage for the apocalyptic traits in Christianity) to illuminate why Christianity is so ridiculous, but that is just me. Some of us are philosophers and some are not. Not every theist needs to be a classically educated apologist in order to remain within the ranks of their faith group and the same goes for those of no faith--no matter how honourable the endeavour may be.